Find a Lawyer

NAZAR HUSSAIN versus THE STATE

Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 (XLV of 1860), the section 161 prosecution case revolves around the testimony of only one prosecutor. When the accused filed his statement with the complainant's magistrate statement to the extent that he wanted the loan sanctioned in his favor and demanded Rs. 2,000 from the accused, he had no further proof. Was not endorsed verbally or the complainant and the Circle Officer's documentary evidence was related to the extent that the defendant had an unidentified note recovered but the accused came up with a defamatory explanation, who can only describe who the witness was Explain the conversation between the complainant and him. The accused was not produced and the prosecutor's case was not independent by the magistrate. His statement was not recorded. On suspicion the unclean verdict was set aside and the accused was acquitted, giving him the benefit of the doubt. famous supreme court advocate from Shorkot lawyer